Do The Beatles still hold up to modern music?

[Larsongs]

10 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

Here is what happened to The Beatles . They were a decent band, and the stars just aligned for them. The right 4 guys, the right studio, the right label, the right producer, the right sound engineers, ect. Everything just happened at the right place at the right time. They end up making some of the most revered music of all time. 

And, The right looks, personalities, innovative style, “Voices”, “Harmonies”, Song writing ability, ambition, the Cool & always being one step ahead of everyone else… Always pushing the Envelope..

True there were lots of guys playing but none of them broke big in the USA until The Beatles shattered that ceiling.. They opened the door..

Almost any musician since The Beatles attributes their being inspirational to them, their music & their Band.. 

[cody78]

Enjoying this debate. Some very good points raised. Someone wondered what I meant by 'hold up'. Well, basically older songs when played in a set of music by more recent artists.  Do the songs still sound as good?  My example was from the gig I went to which mainly consisted of 80's rock & pop covers. I think bands from the 90's and 00's would also be an interesting comparison. Say a band like Pearl Jam or the Smashing Pumpkins from the 90's or the fantastic Mars Volta from the early to mid 00's. My point was basically that a tune like 'Penny Lane' seemed a bit weak when next to 'Everywhere' or 'The Chain' by Fleetwood Mac, Livin' on A Prayer by Bon Jovi or Bat Out of Hell by Meatloaf. I guess the Beatles didn't really 'rock' enough compared with later artists and never had a guitar player who stood out to me. Though Harrison's 'Something' solo is beautifully minimal.  

In my young years (7+)  I was obsessed with Guns N' Roses, Aerosmith and AC/DC and a little known Canadian band called Moist, then in my teenage years (14+) I was equally obsessed with Led Zeppelin. I remember hearing  various Beatles songs throughout that period, but they didn't really appeal to me except for maybe Strawberry Fields and Here Comes the Sun. I did buy Abbey Road when I was about 16 and liked it a lot, but for me it never came close to Led Zep's III, or Physical Graffiti, GN'R's Use Your Illusion or Appetite and Aerosmith's Pump or Get a Grip. I went on to listen to lots of other styles and the Beatles were always just 'ok' to me. 

Someone made a comment about would Beethoven stand up to todays music. Well, yes he would, but many later composers took classical music to a new and maybe more exciting place years later. Composers like Shostakovich, Penderecki, Reich, Part, Barber and Adams. Similarly to the Beatles, Beethoven doesn't always grab my attention, yet the composers I just listed from the 20th century do. 

My favourite records of the last 10-15 years include lesser known albums by Led Bib, Trampled by Turtles, Godspeed You Black Emperor and then in the last few months Chemtrails, NFR and Honeymoon by the very well known Lana Del Rey. There's still many more current artists who will be remembered in years to come I think. 

One of my favourite albums from the 60's is Charles Mingus' The Black Saint & the Sinner Lady. Miles ahead of the Beatles to me, but then I guess it doesn't count as it's jazz and not pop, so an unfair comparison. Released in 1963 it took jazz to a whole other level whilst the Beatles were playing basic pop tunes/ covers. 

Edited October 7, 2023 by cody78

[Notes_Norton]

4 hours ago, cody78 said:

Similarly to the Beatles, Beethoven doesn't always grab my attention, yet the composers I just listed from the 20th century do. 

For me, interesting classical music starts with Beethoven, not all, but especially Symphonies 3, 4 and 7. Before 3 he was still in the Mozart/Hayden mode, but like the Beatles' Rubber Soul and on, he changed music. Prokofiev, Suk, Dvorak, Shostakovitch, Tchaikovsky, Saint-Seans, and others turned out some of my favorite classical music.

I like a lot of jazz too. I lean towards Getz, Turrentine, and Desmond as my main voice is sax, but I also like Jimmy Smith, Miles, Mingus, Kenton, Basie, Corea, Nascimento, Lins and quite a few others.

No matter where it comes from, if it hits me the right way, I like it. And I don't know exactly why some songs turn me on, and something else similar may not. I tried to analyze that at one time, but I gave up, and just enjoy what speaks to me.

The Beatles were never hard rock, so you can't compare them to Zeppelin, Aerosmith, or Bon Jovi. And remember, Fleetwood Mac did a lot of soft rock like Hypnotized, Over My Head, and Sentimental Lady.

On the other hand, I'm Down, I Want You (She's So Heavy), and Revolution, may have been better choices at the concert you attended. I really like I Am The Walrus, but more for the arrangement than the musical value, and that would be difficult to pull off live.

Since 1985, I targeted the +55-year-old audience in Florida, it's good, steady work, and I focus on my audience's desires. So I don't listen to a lot of newer music. When I do, I can't stand it if I hear auto-tune artifacts, and since I'm not a word person, rap bores me. I do hear some decent new things from time to time, but I can't always identify the artist. I've heard some Radiohead, Arctic Moneys, Foo Fighters, Pearl Jam, NIN, Van Fleet, Coldplay, and a few others that I like.

We just learned some Jethro Tull, Fleetwood Mac, Johnny Winter, Metallica, KC & The Sunshine Band, Johnny Cash, Master KG/Nomcebo, Johnny Rivers, and Adele. They make requests, if the client is steady their requests are important, and if the same request comes from multiple audience members that will also elevate its importance.

Since I play music for a living, what I play is chosen by the audience I targeted. It's the compromise, some say sell-out, but IMO, it's not nearly as big a sell-out as working as a wage slave 40 hours a week, so you can play art music on the weekends. https://www.nortonmusic.com/cats/songlist.html

My audience wants memories, the music of their lives, so 30-40 year old music hits their sweet spot. 40-50 still works, and newer than 40 works because they didn't stop listening. I just have to be careful what to select. So I guess I'm not the person to ask if anything old still holds up, because that's my bread and butter.

When it comes to recreational listening, it's everything from Muddy Waters to Prokofiev. I find songs I like in most eras and genres.

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[Narwhal6]

Keep in mind that they were popular in rock's infancy. Take a song like "I Feel Fine" and you can hear John holding his thumb against the opening note to achieve a feedback kind of sound.

There weren't overdrives or gain pedals or really any type of effects available then. They and others were pioneers basically.

And saying they didn't really "rock"? Well listen to this modern version of She said, she said and tell me it doesn't rock. 

 

 

[cody78]

Well, that is quite a good rock version. I don't think many would argue that the Rolling Stones were more rock than the Beatles and the Beatles were more pop/ other styles. Even the Kinks had harder rock songs than the Beatles in the 60's. By the late 60's there were many who had a harder sound than the Beatles final few records. Not that it matters, but I think the Beatles most 'rock sounding' songs would be Helter Skelter, Back in the USSR and a few others, but by 1966-9 Hendrix, Cream, Led Zep had all exceeded them in the 'rock' sound, whilst the Beatles were more soft sounding. That isn't a bad thing, one of the great albums of 1967 was Love's 'Forever Changes' and that didn't rock much at all. I realise there wasn't a high gain sound in the early 60's but by the mid to late 60's some artists were using some very overdriven sounds for the time. For instance Clapton with the Bluesbreakers and that was in 1966! Some of the stuff Jimmy Page was doing in sessions was very overdriven too. 

[cody78]

14 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

For me, interesting classical music starts with Beethoven, not all, but especially Symphonies 3, 4 and 7. Before 3 he was still in the Mozart/Hayden mode, but like the Beatles' Rubber Soul and on, he changed music. Prokofiev, Suk, Dvorak, Shostakovitch, Tchaikovsky, Saint-Seans, and others turned out some of my favorite classical music.

I like a lot of jazz too. I lean towards Getz, Turrentine, and Desmond as my main voice is sax, but I also like Jimmy Smith, Miles, Mingus, Kenton, Basie, Corea, Nascimento, Lins and quite a few others.

No matter where it comes from, if it hits me the right way, I like it. And I don't know exactly why some songs turn me on, and something else similar may not. I tried to analyze that at one time, but I gave up, and just enjoy what speaks to me.

The Beatles were never hard rock, so you can't compare them to Zeppelin, Aerosmith, or Bon Jovi. And remember, Fleetwood Mac did a lot of soft rock like Hypnotized, Over My Head, and Sentimental Lady.

On the other hand, I'm Down, I Want You (She's So Heavy), and Revolution, may have been better choices at the concert you attended. I really like I Am The Walrus, but more for the arrangement than the musical value, and that would be difficult to pull off live.

Since 1985, I targeted the +55-year-old audience in Florida, it's good, steady work, and I focus on my audience's desires. So I don't listen to a lot of newer music. When I do, I can't stand it if I hear auto-tune artifacts, and since I'm not a word person, rap bores me. I do hear some decent new things from time to time, but I can't always identify the artist. I've heard some Radiohead, Arctic Moneys, Foo Fighters, Pearl Jam, NIN, Van Fleet, Coldplay, and a few others that I like.

 

It's great that you make your living from playing music. I respect anyone who can do that. I work as a guitar teacher and was relieved when I finally got the job. To make any money out of music can be a difficult thing. 

For the most part, I would agree with you about Beethoven. I do enjoy a lot of early music pre Beethoven too though, especially choral works by Thomas Tallis, Monteverdi & Allegri and I used to know a person who played early lute stuff which I enjoyed hearing.  A lot of the classical and jazz composers/ musicians you mentioned I am a fan of too. In terms of rockier/ metal stuff I grew up in the late 80's - early 90's and many of the bands I enjoyed in later years came from this period - like The Pixies, Dinosaur Jr, Testament etc. 

Good point about the Beatles not being hard rock and an unfair comparison. At the gig I went to they did play things like I'm Still Standing by Elton and did an excellent version of it. Perhaps as you say, if they had have played something like I am the Walrus it would have fitted together better. 'I Want You (She's so Heavy)' is one of my favourite Beatles songs and would have worked better too. 

I think the Beatles fall into various categories for me, the early stuff which I largely find annoying - especially 'Love Me Do', the mid period when they started to interest me slightly - like Eleanor Rigby, Taxman, then the later period Abbey Road & Let it Be when they had some good tunes. I still remember someone playing me the whole of the 'Help!' album when I was a teenager and thinking it was awful compared to the music I loved at the time. I never got into Sgt. Pepper either, though I do think 'A Day in the Life' is an amazing song. I do appreciate they did some great things with studio techniques at that time though, I guess I just wasn't a fan of the results. Benefit of Mr. Kite being one example. I haven't listened to that record in years. 

Edited October 8, 2023 by cody78

[Sheepdog1969]

Full disclosure: I have only owned one Beatles album, (The White album on CD), and I never replaced it when it was stolen. I defiantly enjoy many Beatles songs, for many different reasons, but I assume that I have never heard every single track that they recorded. However, as an unemotional guy, more than one of their songs have elicited such intense emotions, that I teared up listening to them, (on more than one occasion).  Not that the tracks made me sad, but more like they made me feel great joy based on the entirety of the track's composition/arrangement.

I feel, in order to accurately and objectively begin to respond to Cody's original question, we all must accept that it would be impossible to expect that the entirety of the Beatles' music catalog be able to "hold up to modern music".  It may be best to answer this question by looking at the persistence/presence of the band's music over time (generationally), across societal/demographic/national population subsets, and how often "homages" of said music are commercially re-recorded/performed live by other artists. (including how/if the band's music indelibly wrote itself into modern language/societal perceptions/borderless acceptance) Beethoven is a prime example of an artist who's music meets the criteria detailed above. Even though few of the world's population know the entirety of Beethoven's catalog, one would be hard pressed to find anyone on the planet who didn't know the name "Beethoven" or who hadn't heard at least one of his compositions. Try simply humming the intro to Beethoven's "5th", anywhere on the planet, without someone in ear shot joining in with you and humming the third and fourth bars, (at a minimum). Sing the first line of "Yesterday", anywhere, and I bet you would get a similar response.     

There tend to be certain chord progressions, sometimes combined with emotion eliciting lyrics, when combined with just the right compositional arrangement/score and tonal balance, which result in near global acceptance/enjoyment. Wagner's, "Ride of the Valkyries" generates visceral "get up and go" emotional responses globally, even amongst haters of classical music. Jennifer Hudson's rendition of "Golden Slumbers/Carry that weight" hits me like an emotional gut punch every time I hear it, far more than the original Beatles version does. Yet, without the Beatles creating it, Jennifer couldn't record a version I enjoy more. I venture to say that the Beatles have hit that harmonic "sweet spot", too many times to be random, or happenstance.

Since "modern music" is just that; MODERN, by definition it is new, young, and without evidence of how time will effect it's popularity. How many songs sounded great to you when they were released, but then faded into obscurity soon after, for whatever reason. Conversely, how many "one hit wonders" still have legs, but no one knows any other songs by that artist/band. Time seems like the primary scale to be used when deciding a song's ability to hold up with new releases, year over year. The number of songs an artist/band creates, that are able to survive the test of time, seems to be the scale to be used when deciding if the artist/band holds up with new releases, year over year. Thus, I think the Beatles' music holds up well to modern music, year after year.

Maybe a better question would be, "Can modern music hold up as well, over time, as the music of the Beatles has?" 

Edited October 8, 2023 by Sheepdog1969

[Murph]

56 minutes ago, Sheepdog1969 said:

Maybe a better question would be, "Can modern music hold up as well, over time, as the music of the Beatles has?" 

 

Brilliant.

[rct]

7 hours ago, Sheepdog1969 said:

Maybe a better question would be, "Can modern music hold up as well, over time, as the music of the Beatles has?" 

Of course it can, and of course it will.  Modern music wasn't made for a bunch of geriatric Gibson forumites, just as The Beatles weren't made for a bunch of filthy bearded hipster millennial gen x y z kids all grown up in the year 2050, enjoying the music of their youth.

rct

[Murph]

I seriously doubt anybody will be talking about Taylor Swift's music on a guitar forum 60 years from now.

 

['Scales]

2 hours ago, rct said:

Of course it can, and of course it will.  Modern music wasn't made for a bunch of geriatric Gibson forumites, just as The Beatles weren't made for a bunch of filthy bearded hipster millennial gen x y z kids all grown up in the year 2050, enjoying the music of their youth.

rct

I think that's about right - once the BB1's (pre 56) die or become to old to bother pontificating on line/be relevant, then there will not be much reverence left. Its flickering already. Everyone has a soft spot for and will defend the music of their coming of age years. As Billy Connolly once said, (something like) - " its not the old days I miss...its my youth".

[rct]

2 hours ago, Murph said:

I seriously doubt anybody will be talking about Taylor Swift's music on a guitar forum 60 years from now.

 

Of course you say that, neither of us will be here.

We had our time.  It was great.  Let them have theirs.

rct

[Sgt. Pepper]

19 hours ago, Murph said:

I seriously doubt anybody will be talking about Taylor Swift's music on a guitar forum 60 years from now.

 

Yes they will. She is good looking, and can sing, and play guitar (I guess), and write songs (I guess), and in the eyes of her adoring Army of bracelet wearing Swifties, she is miss perfect, and does no wrong. But Taylor it takes 2 to have sex. And the bad relationships you had with the high profile guys you date, remember you were a part of that, and  I guess its always the guys fault when stuff goes wrong, huh? 

Mark my words - she when eligible, will be inducted the first time elidable into the R N R Hall of Shame, and County's Hall too. 

I feel sorry for the current guy she is dating. He's an NFL player. When it ends what you to look forward to is to have her write a song about how big a d-ouche you were during the relationship. 

Edited October 9, 2023 by Sgt. Pepper

[Sgt. Pepper]

17 hours ago, rct said:

Of course you say that, neither of us will be here.

We had our time.  It was great.  Let them have theirs.

rct

And my brother's back at home with his Beatles and his Stones
We never got it off on that revolution stuff
What a drag
Too many snags

[Larsongs]

5 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

Yes they will. She is good looking, and can sing, and play guitar (I guess), and write songs (I guess), and in the eyes of her adoring Army of bracelet wearing Swifties, she is miss perfect, and does no wrong. But Taylor it takes 2 to have sex. And the bad relationships you had with the high profile guys you date, remember you were a part of that, and  I guess its always the guys fault when stuff goes wrong, huh? 

Mark my words - she when eligible, will be inducted the first time elidable into the R N R Hall of Shame, and County's Hall too. 

I feel sorry for the current guy she is dating. He's an NFL player. When it ends what you to look forward to is to have her write a song about how big a d-ouche you were during the relationship. 

He should bed her & drop her…

[Ceptorman]

10 minutes ago, Larsongs said:

He should bed her & drop her…

And when he's done with her, she won't be a tight end!

[Notes_Norton]

When the Beatles arrived, I was in High School. I didn't think they were bad, and I didn't think they were good either. Their covers of older songs paled in comparison to me, and the musicianship on a lot of their early stuff was mediocre. But I did appreciate some of the song structures, especially the concise B sections.

I found the song "Help" interesting as the melody stayed pretty much on the same pitch while the chords change and the roots descended.

Then when Rubber Soul came out, I was hooked. IMO if they got rid of half the songs on the White Album, it would have made a very good one disc album. Revolver was nice, and the Abbey Road medley was divine.

Their last release, Let It Be showed me just how much George Martin contributed to The Beatles. IMO Phil Spector couldn't save it. Not that the album was bad, it was OK, but it didn't have the George Martin magic.

But that's just my own personal taste coming through. If you disagree, your opinion is just as valid as mine.

Pop music is by nature disposable.

My dad was a Big Band Era fan. But who do we remember out of the hundreds of bands? Perhaps 10?

We remember Sintra, Peggy Lee, and a few others.

As the years go by, the big names fade, and the lesser names fade away. As I said, it's disposable.

Taylor Swift, Lady Gaga, Ed Sheeran, Nicki Minaj, all have their days in the sun, but their stars will eventually fade.

Most people love the music they grew up with the best, and if you grew up with The Kinks, Georgie Fame, Dusty Springfield, The Beatles, The Animals, Lulu, and the rest, you will probably like them until you die. Some newer music will get to you, but won't replace the music of your youth. Of course, as musicians, we should have an open mind and enjoy the music of our parents and our children too, but the music we listened to and played when we were going from childhood to adulthood will always be special.

GenX and GenZ, and others will have their songs and stars that aren't going to be the same as the ones the Boomers grew up with.

The music of your parents and older siblings will always be old music, and as you age, the newer music will be mostly mediocre at best, if not trashy.

And the beat goes on (Thanks Sonny Bono)

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[Sgt. Pepper]

13 hours ago, Larsongs said:

He should bed her & drop her…

They all do, its how you get your song.

[Murph]

12 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

Their last release, Let It Be showed me just how much George Martin contributed to The Beatles. IMO Phil Spector couldn't save it. Not that the album was bad, it was OK, but it didn't have the George Martin magic.

I loved "Let It Be". The desire of them wanting to do a "live" sounding project, WITHOUT the multiple overdubs and tape splicing was brilliant to me. I actually prefer the "Naked" version that Paul remixed to the original release with Spector's influence.

However, I think the thread got a little de-railed.

Perhaps it's just me but I thought it was about the MUSIC holding up to musical standards, not so much PERSONAL preference.

While I'm sure Taylor Swift will have old fans 60 years from now who still like her music, the Beatles work is considered great by scholars, musicians, sound engineers and writers for many of the reasons you stated earlier. Leaving the tonic to go off on a tangent of different progressions, stories and timing, coming back/or not. 

It was so fresh and unheard of in pop music at the time. Your insights and incites are quite good.

[DanvillRob]

13 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

And the beat goes on (Thanks Sonny Bono)

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

Notes, speaking for "The Beat Goes On", I watched a Carol Kaye documentary, (she came up with the famous bass line in that song).  She had more talent in her little finger than 99% of the well-known stars had in their entire bodies.

People who don't know about "The Wrecking Crew", (Carol, Don Randi, Glen Campbell, Leon Russell, Earl Palmer, Tommy Tedesco, etc), are missing some of the greatest musicians who ever played.

[Notes_Norton]

@DanvillRob I help fund The Wrecking Crew movie with my Kickstarter donation. You can see my name on the credits (along with hundreds of others). Great, versatile musicians, every one of them.

---

At one time, stars were icons of the generation; Al Jolson, Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, and The Beatles. Every child knew them and listened to them.

The Beatles were the last. Disco came, and the market was split, and some youths listened to the rock stations, others the disco stations. And since then it split even more with alt-this-and-that, metal, and a dozen others.

Every child in the late 60s and 70s heard every Beatles single release. How many people have heard every Metallica release? Every Radiohead release? Every Taylor Swift release? Sure, they are megastars in their own market, but there are plenty of markets now.

I suppose it's technology's “fault”. When there was only AM radio and three network TV stations, there wasn't enough bandwidth for niche markets.

But like Jolson, Crosby, Sinatra, and Presley, the Beatles will become a footnote in history, when stars that are not as iconic like Badfinger and The Ides of March will be forgotten when their generation exits the stage.

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[DanvillRob]

6 minutes ago, Notes_Norton said:

@DanvillRob I help fund The Wrecking Crew movie with my Kickstarter donation. You can see my name on the credits (along with hundreds of others). Great, versatile musicians, every one of them.

 

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

I'd like to see the movie..... where can I get it?

These guys (+ Carol) were so far ahead of guys like me in their knowledge of music, it's incredible.

I took music theory in college....so I understand their language, but I'm not conversant in it....and it's second nature to them!

[Sgt. Pepper]

21 minutes ago, DanvillRob said:

I'd like to see the movie..... where can I get it?

These guys (+ Carol) were so far ahead of guys like me in their knowledge of music, it's incredible.

I took music theory in college....so I understand their language, but I'm not conversant in it....and it's second nature to them!

Netflix

And Carol was guitar player most of her life,  and then one day the bass player didn't show up for a session and the rest as they say . . . 

Hey Pepper play a D#dim7min13 chord in that last chorus. Sure just show me where to put my fingers.

Edited October 10, 2023 by Sgt. Pepper

[Larsongs]

27 minutes ago, DanvillRob said:

I'd like to see the movie..... where can I get it?

These guys (+ Carol) were so far ahead of guys like me in their knowledge of music, it's incredible.

I took music theory in college....so I understand their language, but I'm not conversant in it....and it's second nature to them!

The whole movie is on YouTube..

[Larsongs]

In case you didn’t know… Sirius Radio is very big! There are dedicated Elvis, Beatles, Sinatra, 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s 00’s Stations that play all that disposable Music.. Which is actually incorrect.. If it was disposable no one would be tuning in & listening… People haven’t thrown it away..

I subscribe to it & enjoy hearing all that disposable music.. There must be quite a few others too or the Station wouldn’t be around..

I have a friend who teaches 60’s Music classes at the College level.. His Classes are always full…

Taste is subjective.. As are opinions..